Telangana High Court Upholds Visa Compliance Process for Pakistani Nationals
The Telangana High Court has delivered a significant ruling in a case involving a Karachi-born resident of Hyderabad, declining to grant relief while emphasizing that ensuring compliance with visa regulations does not constitute coercive action. The court has directed the Home Department and Hyderabad police to consider the petitioner's application for a Long Term Visa (LTV) in accordance with the government's April 28, 2025 guidelines.
Government Order Mandates Fresh LTV Applications
The central government's order issued on April 28, 2025, requires all Pakistani nationals holding Long Term Visas who have not obtained Indian citizenship to apply afresh for these visas. This directive forms the basis of the current legal proceedings and has significant implications for foreign nationals residing in India under long-term visa arrangements.
Petitioner's Claims and Court's Observations
The petitioner, Syed Ali Hussain Razvi, a 33-year-old man, claimed Indian citizenship by birth and challenged the actions of the Special Branch of Hyderabad police, alleging harassment for compelling him to apply for a Long Term Visa. Razvi asserted that he was born and brought up in Hyderabad, has lived there all his life, and is married to an Indian citizen.
However, Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka noted that Razvi's claim of Indian citizenship by birth is disputed and that he has not produced any conclusive statutory proof of citizenship under the Citizenship Act, 1955. The court specifically mentioned that documents such as a certificate of registration, naturalization, or a valid Indian passport were absent from the petitioner's submissions.
Identity Discrepancies and Statutory Framework
The Government Pleader for the Home Department submitted crucial information revealing significant discrepancies in the petitioner's identity particulars. According to official records, Razvi's name was recorded in his mother Gohar Fathima's Pakistani passport as Imran Abid alias Imran Hussain. Furthermore, authorities stated that Razvi and his mother arrived in India in February 1994, three years after his birth in Karachi.
The court made a critical observation regarding identification documents: "The reliance placed by petitioner on Aadhaar card, Voter ID card, PAN card, driving licence and educational certificates cannot, by themselves, confer or establish citizenship, particularly when the statutory framework governing foreigners mandates determination of nationality based on passport, visa status, and orders passed by competent authorities under the Foreigners Act, 1946."
Court's Rationale and Final Disposition
In disposing of the case, the court held that visits by authorities to ensure compliance with visa regulations cannot be equated with coercive or punitive action without due process. The bench rejected the plea of violation of principles of natural justice, holding that the actions of the respondents were part of an ongoing statutory verification and compliance process initiated following the government order of April 28, 2025.
The court also noted that Razvi's mother's status itself is the subject matter of a writ petition pending adjudication. The judge ruled that the petitioner, whose status is derivative and disputed, cannot seek a blanket declaration restraining statutory authorities from performing their duties under the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Foreigners Order, 1946, and the Visa Manual, 2019.
Justice Bheemapaka concluded that granting the relief sought by the petitioner "would effectively preclude the respondents from enforcing statutory mandates." The court disposed of the petition after reaching a considered view that the petitioner has not made out any case warranting intervention.
Broader Implications of the Ruling
This judgment reinforces the importance of proper documentation and compliance with immigration regulations for foreign nationals residing in India. The court's emphasis on statutory proof of citizenship rather than secondary identification documents establishes a significant precedent for similar cases involving disputed citizenship claims.
The ruling also highlights the ongoing implementation of the government's April 2025 guidelines requiring Pakistani nationals with Long Term Visas to reapply, ensuring that immigration authorities can properly verify the status of foreign residents in accordance with current regulations and national security considerations.
